Jogging/running isn't very natural

mickrock

--Kaiser-- wrote: »

Because we wear shoes and it throws off the natural stride. You can't run with a heel strike when you are barefoot because it would actually be painful. Padded shoes let you off with your poor form but you can still be doing damage to your joints

Since most people can't/won't run without shoes, wouldn't they be better off not running at all?

foxyboxer

mickrock wrote: »

Since most people can't/won't run without shoes, wouldn't they be better off not running at all?

Not necessarily.

I ran the Dublin Marathon this year with a pair of these.
http://barefootrunningshoes.org/wp-content/gallery/vibram-fivefingers-classic-mens/VFF%20Classic%20Front%20Side%20Off%20Angle.jpg

No heel striking there!

mickrock

foxyboxer wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistence_hunting

When these "persistence hunters" caught a large animal it would keep them fed for several days.

They didn't have to run long distances on a daily basis, so it doesn't compare to modern day runners.

robinph

mickrock wrote: »

When these "persistence hunters" caught a large animal it would keep them fed for several days.

They didn't have to run long distances on a daily basis, so it doesn't compare to modern day runners.

It also doesn't compare to modern day lazy people who don't run.

mickrock

robinph wrote: »

It also doesn't compare to modern day lazy people who don't run.

So you equate not running with laziness. Bizzare.

Walking is an effective and safer form of exercise.

It wasn't me!

mickrock wrote: »

So you equate not running with laziness. Bizzare.

Walking is an effective and safer form of exercise.

Walking is very, very different. Precious few people walk fast enough or far enough (And nowhere near often enough) for it to be of comparable value, and it still exercises the body in a different way. Walking quickly burns more fat than running, but it'll never have the same cardiovascular benefit.

robinph

mickrock wrote: »

So you equate not running with laziness. Bizzare.

Walking is an effective and safer form of exercise.

Nope, I equate being lazy as being lazy.

If you want a safe form of exercise then take up swimming. Only form of injury likely there is banging your head against a wall or drowning.

It seems that people are not looking for different form of exercise though, they are looking to justify their being lazy and not doing any exercise.

mickrock

robinph wrote: »

It seems that people are not looking for different form of exercise though, they are looking to justify their being lazy and not doing any exercise.

Being lazy might possibly be healthier than engaging in a potentially dangerous form of exercise.

ScumLord

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I don't know, i'm still not sold!
As for big cats running down their prey, or wolves and so on, all i see is sporadic sprinting. I don't see any other animal that jogs, they either walk or they run at top speed or fairly close to it.
Maybe the sweating thing is the difference, but i'm still not sold!

Cats don't run down their prey, they're ambush predators. Even cheetahs sprint rather than run, they gas very quickly and depend on power and skilled killing techniques to take down their prey.

wolves (and humans) will find the animal they want out of the heard separate it and give chase. They will simply keep it running until it overheats and can't fight back, humans will be nice about it and stick a spear in it to confirm it's dead wolves will just start ripping it apart.

If you look at the difference between cats legs as opposed to what you'll see on humans/wolves, cats have short muscular legs for overpowering prey whereas humans/wolves have long legs meaning they use less energy when running but not being particularly strong.

Wolves take hours to make a kill, cats take minutes.

The King of Moo

mickrock wrote: »

Being lazy might possibly be healthier than engaging in a potentially dangerous form of exercise.

Remarks like this make you seem like you're being defensive about being lazy.

Being lazy is not healthy, full stop.

Doing exercise properly is definitely healthier than doing it badly, and is infinitely healthier than being lazy.

RichieC

Humans are the best runners of the animal kingdom... we are amazingly well suited to it.

average_runner

mickrock wrote: »

Lots of people are into running for health reasons but I don't think humans are really suited to this form of exercise.

Where does it say that having an elevated heart rate for an extended period of time is good for you?

Running is a high impact activity, which our feet are not designed for.

What's wrong with a nice brisk walk?

How do you think we hunted when we didnt know how to use weapons?
Also there is a tribe that hunt animals by running only.

Running perfectly natural to human body. Sitting on your arse is not!

44leto

It is natural, it was our advantage over our prey on the African plains. Human have more sweat pours then any other mammal. So we can cool. So we could set off after a prey that can run faster then us and relentlessly chase it down till it collapsed from heat exhaustion.

There are still African native tribes who hunt like that. But others have AKs or a supermarket.

Pherekydes

mickrock wrote: »

Being lazy might possibly be healthier than engaging in a potentially dangerous form of exercise.

Hahahaha.

ScumLord wrote: »

If you look at the difference between cats legs as opposed to what you'll see on humans/wolves, cats have short muscular legs for overpowering prey whereas humans/wolves have long legs meaning they use less energy when running but not being particularly strong.

Wolves take hours to make a kill, cats take minutes.

Cats make take seconds. And cheetahs have very long legs relative to their body size and are built purely for flat out sprinting. They can't retract their claws, their head is quite small, they have a long tail for balance at high speed and they have a super-flexible spines to maximize their stride length.

bnt

My take, from experience: if you're at a normal-to-light weight, jogging is fine. If you're overweight, you need to do something low impact and get the extra weight off first. You're going to over-stress or break something if you just start running while overweight - and it's very uncomfortable, too. Our ancestors were better at running, but then our ancestors rarely lived well enough to become overweight, so the comparison is bogus.

It's a solo sport: you're only competing against yourself, and you have nothing to prove to anyone else, so there is no justification for risking injury by doing too much, too soon.

kate.m

...wait so I'd be better off running in flat shoes rather than your typical running shoe? like asics? (the ones with the large heel)

I usually run on grass (old trainer said for long distance it was better - less chance to damage my knee joints)

but if I have to run on a path or whatever - should someone wear flexible flat shoes or the nike/asics running ones?

mickrock

The King of Moo wrote: »

Remarks like this make you seem like you're being defensive about being lazy.

Remarks like this make you seem like you're being defensive about running.

Compared to other types of exercise, running is potentially damaging to the heart and joints/ligaments/tendons.

average_runner

Every sport has its dangers!!

Swimming you could cramp and drown.
Soccer/hurling/Football all involves running and sprints which is tougher on heart, hamstrings etc and more leg breaks.

Could name loads more.

But wouldnt say any of these sports are bad for you.

Pherekydes

mickrock wrote: »

Remarks like this make you seem like you're being defensive about running.

Compared to other types of exercise, running is potentially damaging to the heart and joints/ligaments/tendons.

It's not damaging to the heart. CV exercise strengthens the cardiac muscle.
If you do it right you won't damage the other stuff, either.

Haven't you read any of the stuff linked to or posted?

mickrock

Pherekydes wrote: »

It's not damaging to the heart. CV exercise strengthens the cardiac muscle.

Cardiovascular exercise is good for the heart but I think running puts it under too much pressure.

You do hear of a lot of marathon runners who drop dead after running, as did the guy who popularised jogging in the 1970s.

Top 10 reasons not to run marathons:

http://www.arthurdevany.com/articles/20091028

ScumLord

average_runner wrote: »

Every sport has its dangers!!

Swimming you could cramp and drown.
Soccer/hurling/Football all involves running and sprints which is tougher on heart, hamstrings etc and more leg breaks.

Could name loads more.

But wouldnt say any of these sports are bad for you.

Bowling and darts however is very bad for your heart as they lead to obesity.

syklops

Wattle wrote: »

I used to go jogging from the house but I ended up getting plagued by injuries. Running on hard concrete streets is murder on your knees and ankles. I go swimming instead now. It's an all over body exercise and is virtually injury free.

You could drown.

Wibbs

RichieC wrote: »

Humans are the best runners of the animal kingdom... we are amazingly well suited to it.

Try telling a wolf that. They can lope/jog huge distances over a day(IIRC highest on record was one male wolf who covered 60 miles in a 24 hour period) and can hit 40MPH at full gallop and hold said gallop for longer than a cheetah at full gallop. Archaic humans like Homo Erectus were better suited to running than modern homo sapiens, so something seems to have reduced our need for a running ability in the interim. It defo did with Neandertals who likely would have been poor runners over the medium and especially long distances compared to us.

Loudova

Only run when being chased, that's my motto.

ScumLord

Wibbs wrote: »

Try telling a wolf that. They can lope/jog huge distances over a day(IIRC highest on record was one male wolf who covered 60 miles in a 24 hour period) and can hit 40MPH at full gallop and hold said gallop for longer than a cheetah at full gallop.

Could they do it during mid day in African heat though? That's where we shine and where our skin gives us an advantage.

Wibbs

ScumLord wrote: »

Could they do it during mid day in African heat though?

Well if you shaved one maybe, but good luck with that... Plus they move pretty well in the summer heat of the inner continental US and Russia. The African wild dog would be a good runner too. Not far off the wolf. Jackal ditto.

sock puppet

Wattle wrote: »

I used to go jogging from the house but I ended up getting plagued by injuries. Running on hard concrete streets is murder on your knees and ankles. I go swimming instead now. It's an all over body exercise and is virtually injury free.

The only problem is distance swimming is possibly the only thing in the world more boring than distance running.

Pherekydes

mickrock wrote: »

Cardiovascular exercise is good for the heart but I think running puts it under too much pressure.

You do hear of a lot of marathon runners who drop dead after running, as did the guy who popularised jogging in the 1970s.

Top 10 reasons not to run marathons:

http://www.arthurdevany.com/articles/20091028

You're just getting embarrassing, now. The death rate during marathon races is no higher than the population at large.

mickrock

A Case Against Cardio (from a former mileage king)

"The costs of chronic (repetitious) mid- and high-level aerobic work
- requires large amounts of dietary carbohydrates (SUGAR)
- decreases efficient fat metabolism
- increases stress hormone cortisol
- increases systemic inflammation
- increases oxidative damage (free radical production)"


http://www.marksdailyapple.com/case-against-cardio/

ScumLord

Wibbs wrote: »

Well if you shaved one maybe, but good luck with that... Plus they move pretty well in the summer heat of the inner continental US and Russia. The African wild dog would be a good runner too. Not far off the wolf. Jackal ditto.

I think that the right human (not some fat westerner) could outperform a wolf, which is the animal we were discussing, not your fancy mickey mouse eared dog.

I think this needs a proper experiment, all we need to do is find some way of importing wolves into Africa, then round up some mickey mouse eared dogs, convince a jackal to heal and convince some African tribesmen to race the lot of them (I'm guessing this will be the easy part). My moneys on the human, probably because the human would kill the other two on the sly. I'm a real humanist. We're a great bunch of lads really, the rest aren't even lads at all at the end of the day.

ScumLord

mickrock wrote: »

A Case Against Cardio (from a former mileage king)

"The costs of chronic (repetitious) mid- and high-level aerobic work
- requires large amounts of dietary carbohydrates (SUGAR)

Pizza and red bull.

- decreases efficient fat metabolism

Less pizza and red bull.

- increases stress hormone cortisol

Weed.

- increases systemic inflammation

More weed.

- increases oxidative damage (free radical production)"

Cup of tea and a spliff.

I think there's very few that will do enough exercise to be in this position.

Naomi00

Lol I love the elaborate excuses that lazy people come up with to avoid excercise :pac:


OP, put 2+2 together.

The heart is a muscle and needs to be exercised or it won't work properly, obviously the way to do that is to increase the heart rate. A very good way of which is running. Prevents future heart problems etc.

There a million other reasons why running is good this is just the major thing you have wrong in the OP


/endthread

ScumLord

Naomi00 wrote: »

The heart is a muscle and needs to be exercised or it won't work properly, obviously the way to do that is to increase the heart rate. A very good way of which is running. Prevents future heart problems etc.

What about stress and hard drugs? They always get my heart racing.

Temptamperu

mickrock wrote: »

Lots of people are into running for health reasons but I don't think humans are really suited to this form of exercise.

Where does it say that having an elevated heart rate for an extended period of time is good for you?

Running is a high impact activity, which our feet are not designed for.

What's wrong with a nice brisk walk?

Our bodies are actually designed to run long distances we have stopped using our natural talents and gone soft though, theres a tribe in africa that has hunters that run upwards of thirty miles per day. Our glutus maximus can be one of the most powerful muscles in our bodies so technically running is what we evolved to do really well.

ScumLord

Temptamperu wrote: »

Our bodies are actually designed to run long distances we have stopped using our natural talents and gone soft though, theres a tribe in africa that has hunters that run upwards of thirty miles per day. Our glutus maximus can be one of the most powerful muscles in our bodies so technically running is what we evolved to do really well.

Plus the thing about that particular muscle is it only really works during running. If you think about it being attracted to asses makes perfect sense as it would mean passing on good running abilities to your offspring. Running tribes are not restricted to Africa either there are some in south America too.

Naomi00

Temptamperu wrote: »

Our bodies are actually designed to run long distances we have stopped using our natural talents and gone soft though, theres a tribe in africa that has hunters that run upwards of thirty miles per day. Our glutus maximus can be one of the most powerful muscles in our bodies so technically running is what we evolved to do really well.

Exactly, humans in the West anyway, have gotten weaker.

How does anyone think the Celts etc survived living in Ireland and how would they have lived the way they did unless they were really strong and fit? Humans aren't meant to be weak, they just can live like that now because it's obviously easier to live in modern times than if you lived a few hundred years ago.
Anyway stuff like this catches up with people when they get old.

rainbow kirby

Running makes me happy. That feels pretty damn natural to me.

It wasn't me!

rainbow kirby nailed it. Running hard feels incredible. It's just so obviously natural to me that the original supposition here is self-evidently daft. Nothing else feels so much like fulfilling your physical potential.

ScumLord

Naomi00 wrote: »

Exactly, humans in the West anyway, have gotten weaker.

I don't think we've gotten weaker, Europeans at least still rank highly in sports. Your body can do these things we just don't utilise and develop those ability's. The human adapts to it's environment, it's our other thing that makes us great. If society collapsed tomorrow you'd have human animals normalised to that environment within 5 -15 years. Where other animals would simply die out, humans adapt.

mickrock

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Running makes me happy. That feels pretty damn natural to me.

Eating chocalate cake makes some people happy.

That doesn't mean it's natural or healthy.

The King of Moo

mickrock wrote: »

Eating chocalate cake makes some people happy.

That doesn't mean it's natural or healthy.

But running makes one happy by releasing endorphins, pleasure-giving chemicals, without the obvious drawbacks of eating unhealthy food.

Do I really actually have to state that?

I smell a troll...

wandatowell

kraggy wrote: »

I've a horse.

Thats what she said

mickrock

The King of Moo wrote: »

But running makes one happy by releasing endorphins, pleasure-giving chemicals, without the obvious drawbacks of eating unhealthy food.

Running has drawbacks too.

Do you comprehend?

The King of Moo

mickrock wrote: »

Running has drawbacks too.

Do you comprehend?

None worth even considering next to the drawbacks involved in regularly eating chocolate cake.

That's the gist of the majority of replies in this thread really: yes running can have drawbacks, but only to the same extent as most fairly routine activities, and is infinitely superior to not exercising.

It wasn't me!

mickrock wrote: »

Running has drawbacks too.

Do you comprehend?

So does growing old.

mickrock

The King of Moo wrote: »

yes running can have drawbacks, but only to the same extent as most fairly routine activities, and is infinitely superior to not exercising.

You make it sound like running is as harmless as picking daisies!

Runners have an expression: "There are two types of runner, the injured runner and the about to be injured runner."

In any year two thirds of runners have injuries at some point. I'd call that a major drawback.

mickrock

Pherekydes wrote: »

It's not damaging to the heart.

'In one of the largest recent studies, published in January, Canadian researchers recruited 129 non-elite runners in Winnipeg and tested their blood just before they ran a half or full marathon. Their blood markers for heart injury were normal. By the time they’d reached the finish line, though, according to blood tests done there, most of the half-marathoners and even more of the marathoners displayed elevated troponin and other blood markers of heart damage, and after an hour, when they were tested yet again, even more of both groups, especially the marathoners, showed blood indicators of cardiac damage. “We measure those same blood markers when someone comes in to the emergency room and we suspect a heart attack,” says Davinder S. Jassal, MD, an assistant professor of cardiology, radiology, and physiology at the University of Manitoba medical school in Winnipeg and lead author of the study. Blood profiles like those displayed by the runners, he says, “are similar to those in a very mild heart attack.”'

Pherekydes

mickrock wrote: »

'In one of the largest recent studies, published in January, Canadian researchers recruited 129 non-elite runners in Winnipeg and tested their blood just before they ran a half or full marathon. Their blood markers for heart injury were normal. By the time they’d reached the finish line, though, according to blood tests done there, most of the half-marathoners and even more of the marathoners displayed elevated troponin and other blood markers of heart damage, and after an hour, when they were tested yet again, even more of both groups, especially the marathoners, showed blood indicators of cardiac damage. “We measure those same blood markers when someone comes in to the emergency room and we suspect a heart attack,” says Davinder S. Jassal, MD, an assistant professor of cardiology, radiology, and physiology at the University of Manitoba medical school in Winnipeg and lead author of the study. Blood profiles like those displayed by the runners, he says, “are similar to those in a very mild heart attack.”'

And here is the next paragraph:

But most sports cardiologists are quick to point out that the majority of these studies have been small and the results open to differing interpretations. “We don’t necessarily completely understand what’s going on inside” the hearts of runners during a marathon race, says Paul D. Thompson, MD, the chief of cardiology at Hartford Hospital in Connecticut and one of the nation’s leading experts on sports cardiology, as well as, himself, an avid marathon runner. “It’s possible that the heart may be stressed somewhat” by the exertion of a marathon race, he says, just as quadriceps and other muscles are. But “most folks don’t really think there is serious cardiac damage,” he continues, “although there may be fatigue, transient cardiac fatigue.” It’s also possible that some of the blood markers indicate damage to muscles other than the heart. Injured skeletal muscles produce excess troponin, too, he says, and although the troponin measured in the current studies has molecular qualities that indicate it originated in the heart, “it’s just not really clear yet what’s going on,” he says. He’s still running marathons and has no plans to stop.

daithimacgroin

is this thread still happening?

Jaysus Mick, get over it, running is not bad for you, never has never will

Nike are bad for you

daithimacgroin

is this thread still happening?

Jaysus Mick, get over it, running is not bad for you, never has never will

Nike are bad for you